User talk:Davidlooser

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Davidlooser, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

I suggest you read WP:DATESNO. The "th" in November 29th, 1911 is not allowed. It should be 29 November 1911 for "British" dates or November 29, 1911 for "American" dates. Bgwhite (talk) 06:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh... There are so many "rules" on how to do things that you will never remember everything. I know I've forgotten more than I currently remember. Best to do a search if you are not sure. Very interesting article about the theatre you have done. If you live near it, you are very lucky. It made me remember the good times I had at my neighborhood 1930 built theatre I went to when I was young. Thank you for the good memories. Bgwhite (talk) 07:10, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in the cinema. I don't just live near it, I'm one of the Trustees of the Electric Palace trust.

As for the rules, well there are too many of them, and some of them are wrong, such as this one. The idea that "British" dates should be written "29 November 1911" is bizzare. Who invented these idiotic rules?

Davidlooser (talk) 14:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David. To be fair, British style guides seem to be tending that way these days (and I can see there is a logic to dmy that there isn't to mdy, although the "th" makes no difference to the logic). In any case, I find it's best not to get bogged down with these style issues in Wikipedia - that way lies endless circular debate! - and just follow the rules for the sake of consistency (or ignore them and let somebody else who's more worried about consistency fix "breaches". As a copy editor for more than a quarter of a century, I have to say that though I appreciate the need for and strive for consistency, I more and more believe that it is over-rated at the expense of simple comprehensibility. In other words, if only all the time we spent fretting over the odd hyphen or date format were spent actually trying to improve the quality of people's writing instead...). Barnabypage (talk) 10:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a reason why I love math and computers... it didn't involve writing. So, I just try to follow the "rules" because I don't know any better. Some rules are enforced while others are more lax. Adding "th" will bring the wrath of bots upon the article as it is easy to write computer code for it. Which date format you use, ehh, almost nobody will enforce it and it is hard to encode. For American articles, 99% follow the same pattern, but for other articles I see both patterns. The important thing is to use the same pattern throughout the article. The theatre article used both patterns, so it was bound to be found out and converted to the default "British" pattern. The Template:Use dmy dates has been added to the article to allow bots and editors to know what format the article should use.

Most of the rules have been reached by "consensus" over time. Consensus being a super-majority of editors reached a decision that could include concessions. That doesn't mean everybody agreed as you don't with the date patterns. But, the rules should be followed. I have written in scientific journals and they have their own rules which differ upon topic. For example, writing a history article vs. a physics. Just think of Wikipedia as a journal with their own rules. So, unfortunately for you, re-editing the article to keep the "th" is a losing argument. If you keep re-editing, you will get a temporary ban.

Do you have any photos of the inside of the theatre? Would be nice to see what the inside looks like, especially over time. Only other comments I can think of is: As a member of the Trust, might want to expand on what the Trust does; more references would be nice, for example each different projector paragraph could have a reference even if it is the same reference.; might want to take it to Wikipedia:Peer review to get any other suggestions. It is a really nice article which I can't say to 98% of the article by new users. So, you really need to be commended for writing a good article about an interesting subject. Bgwhite (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do have photos of the inside. I agree that it'd be nice to include some, but I didn't take them so I'll have to check with the photographers concerned that they are happy to let me put them up.

As for the date format issue, yes you are right: because it's easy to write a bot to "correct" them I'm on a losing wicket if I keep re-editing back to what I originally wrote and what, in my very unhumble opinion, is not only a perfectly correct format, but is also, for this article at least, the most appropriate. But even if I can't add the "th" I'd far rather use mdy than dmy. "29 November" simply looks tacky and sloppy as if written by someone who didn't care. So I'll re-edit to "November 29" etc. because it's rather less awful than "29 November" and no less "British"

Davidlooser (talk) 06:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I personally see no harm in using November 29 in the article, but it is only my opinion. If you do change the date format, make sure you use the same format for the entire article and delete the Template:Use dmy dates from the article or bots will have fun with you. Bgwhite (talk) 08:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Digital cinema, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]